Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Millage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Pete Beach commissioners weigh millage options as staff readies budget moves
Summary
Finance staff presented ad valorem revenue options and the commission debated whether to hold millage flat or raise it; several commissioners favored keeping millage unchanged while rightsizing enterprise fees first and requested more budget detail before adopting a rate.
The St. Pete Beach City Commission reviewed ad valorem revenue history and three millage options for the fiscal‑year 2027 budget before giving staff direction to refine the budget and return with specific recommendations.
Devin Schmidt, the city's finance director, walked commissioners through taxable value trends and three legally distinct millage choices: the rollback rate (3.075 mills, which by statute yields essentially the same revenue as the prior year), the current rate (3.0913 mills) and a higher two‑thirds rate (shown at about 3.833 mills) that would require a supermajority vote to adopt. Schmidt noted the city retains roughly 19% of a typical taxable‑value bill and that the taxable base is heavily weighted toward non‑homestead properties (hotels and investor‑owned units).
The presentation also modeled a prospective state change that would reduce ad valorem collections by an estimated $1.1 million in the first year and more in later years, and staff emphasized that the commission must provide a preliminary millage direction before TRIM notices are issued at the end of July.
Commissioner responses and direction: several commissioners urged caution about simultaneously raising millage and adopting large fee increases for enterprise funds. "Raising the millage on top of raising all the fees is a hard number to swallow," one commissioner said, and multiple members expressed a preference to hold the millage flat for now while the commission rightsizes enterprise rates and confirms recovery projections. The finance budget review committee had recommended the higher 3.833‑mil option, but the full commission did not adopt that at the workshop.
Staff follow‑up requested: commissioners asked staff to model the budget impacts of keeping the millage flat, of modest increases, and to clarify how ad valorem revenue versus user fees would be used to restore reserves and address recovery‑related spending. The city manager and finance director said they will return with updated budget visualizations and suggested options before formal adoption steps.
No formal vote was taken on millage at the workshop; the commission paused further budget items and scheduled follow‑up work to give staff time to prepare comparative analyses and the materials needed for TRIM.
